The court mandates the verification of petitioners' eligibility for pro rata pension linked to prior cases, ensuring timely communication of denials and the obligation to pay interest on delays.

Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Directive Principles of State Policy - Grant of pro rata pension - Petitioners claim to be similarly placed as the petitioners in prior cases being Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India. - The respondents are directed to verify eligibility for pro rata pension within twelve weeks. - Failure to grant pension timely incurs interest. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Right to Appeal - Right of appeal to the Supreme Court is preserved regarding the prior judgments. (Paras 3 and 4)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners seek pro rata pension based on their similar status to previous petitioners in connected cases, having provided the required No Objection Certificate.

Findings of Court:
If the petitioners are found eligible, they will receive arrears of pension; otherwise, they shall be informed in writing.

Issues: The essential question was whether the petitioners were entitled to pro rata pension akin to prior litigants.

Ratio Decidendi: The court reaffirmed that verification against past judgments is necessary; those not entitled will receive written explanation.

Result: Petition disposed of favorably for the petitioners, pending verification.

Table of Content
1. claim for pro rata pension based on similarity. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents' concession regarding verification. (Para 3)
3. court directs grant of pro rata pension. (Para 4)
4. interest on delayed pension payments. (Para 5)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Learned counsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners in this petition claim to be similarly placed to the petitioners in Brijlal Kumar v. Union of India and others connected petitions 2020 SCC OnLine Del 1477 and the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava v. Union of India, 2019 SCC OnLine Del 6425 (DB) [against which Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 8813/2019 has been dismissed on 26th April, 2019] and seek the same relief as claimed therein i.e. of pro rata pension.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, on enquiry, states that the requisite No Objection Certificated (NOC) had been given.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents fairly states that subject to the right to verification and the right of appeal to the Supreme Court against the judgment in Brijlal Kumar (supra) being saved, the petition be disposed of.

4. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents Indian Air Force that within twelve weeks herefrom, if they find the petitioners to be similarly placed as the petitioners in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra, to grant them the same relief as granted in those petitions i.e. by payment of arrears of pro rata pension from the date of discharge till the date of payment and in future to continue to pay pro rata pension to the petitioners. However, if on verification it is found that the petitioners, for any reason, are not entitled to pro rata pension for reasons other than those stated in the judgments in Govind Kumar Srivastava (supra) and Brijlal Kumar (supra) and other connected petitions supra being in personam, the respondents, within the said twelve weeks, shall communicate to the petitioners, not so found entitled, the reasons in writing thereof and in which event, the petitioners shall be entitled to take further remedies there against.

5. If the arrears of pro rata pension are not paid within twelve weeks, the same shall also incur interest thereon @ 7% per annum from the expiry of twelve weeks till the date of payment.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document